Re: Average Font Size in the Simulation

On 2020-10-07 08:30, Myles C. Maxfield wrote:
>> On Oct 6, 2020, at 6:15 PM, Garret Rieger <grieger@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> During the last call there was a question about what the typical font size was for each language grouping in the simulation. I gathered up the sizes of the fonts used in each language grouping and computed the average file size (as a woff2)
> Are the fonts actually woff2 files?

My understanding is that woff2 of the whole font was the 100% baseline 
against which any savings (or losses!) from PFE were measured. If I have 
that wrong, please correct me.

My understanding is also that for patch subset, the initial font 
download id a woff2 (thus, using Brotli) and that binary patches sent 
subsequently are also Brotli compressed and make use of the compression 
dictionary for the initial font download.

And for glyph byterange, the initial download is a woff2 which is halted 
once the start of the glyf table (r the charstrings part of the CFF 
table) is detected; and that the byteranges specified over HTTP relate 
to the uncompressed font (because HTTP compression is transparent). And 
the byterange downloads do not benefit from the Brotli compression 
dictionary but each one can use (a separate) Brotli compression step (or 
zlib compression step) as determined by the server HTTP setup. Yes?

>> weighted by the number of occurrences of each font within that group. Here are the results:
>>
>> Latin, Cyrillic, Greek, and Thai: 31 kb
>> Arabic and Indic: 47 kb
>> CJK: 1002 kb
> It would be great if we could get a breakdown with box-and-whiskers plots rather than just averages.
Yes, I think that would be a lot more helpful.

-- 
Chris Lilley
@svgeesus
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media

Received on Wednesday, 7 October 2020 12:28:25 UTC